I 143
Actualism/Dennett:onlythat what is real is possible - The mind can only be regarded as an activity, not as a substance.
I 163
Determinism/actualism/Dennett:someauthors: if determinism is correct, actualism must also be correct. Or the other way around. If actualism is wrong, indeterminism would have to be right - DennettVs: this is wrong! E.g. This oxygen atom can combine with two hydrogen atoms. So something is possible which is not real now, therefore determinism is wrong. DennettVsActualism: it is wrong, regardless of the truth or falsity of determinism. >Determinism.
I 249
Actualism/DennettVsNietzsche:hedid not believe in any variants, but in exact repetition. Therefore he was a follower of actualism.

The author or concept searched is found in the following 4 controversies.

Disputed term/author/ism

Author Vs Author

Entry

Reference

Actualism

Dennett Vs Actualism

I 162
Determinism/Actualism/Dennett:someauthors: if the determinism is correct, the actualism must also be right. Or the other way around. If the actualism was wrong, indeterminism would have to be right.
DennettVs: that’s wrong. E.g. This oxygen atom can combine with two hydrogen atoms. So something is possible which is not real now, so the determinism is false. >Determinism.
DennettVsActualism: it is wrong, regardless of the truth or falsity of the determinism.
I 249
DennettVsNietzsche:hedid not believe in any variants, but in exact repetition. Therefore, he was a follower of actualism.
I 360
Dennett:wereject actualism, but how may we not go so far in the other direction as to assert that the space of the real possibilities is more densely occupied than is the case.

Stalnaker I 6
PossibleWorlds/Existence/Stalnaker:Dilemma:
a) Realism: one can say that there is a variety of worlds.
b) Actualism: one can say that only one - our real world - is actual, the rest is only possible.
Then actualism contradicts realism.

Actualism/realism/possible worlds/Stalnaker: Both positions say it can be explained as a misunderstanding.
Realism/Stalnaker: According to him, the misunderstanding can be found in the realm of the quantifier: if it is unlimited, then the statement that there are many possible worlds is true. But the quantifier is often limited to a subset of what exists, and if interpreted as such, the statement is false.
I 7
Actualism/Stalnaker:Thisexplanation is not at his disposal because he says that the actual concurs with the real, so that both limited and unlimited quantification concur.
For him the misunderstanding is embedded in the term "world". When we are talking about the actual world, we are talking about the state of something.
Existence/to exist/Instance/to be instantiated/Stalnaker: There are, however, many different modes of how a world can be and these modes are presently existing.
But only one of those modes is instantiated. And only one universe is instantiated.
Possible worlds/Stalnaker: It would not be true to say that there is a number of possible worlds. It would, however, be true to say that there is number of modes.
Possible worlds/Stalnaker: It could be said that they can exist without having instances.
Ersatz world/Ersatzwelt/LewisVsStalnaker/LewisVsActualism: This is what Lewis calls "ersatz worlds": in the same vein: a current king of France would be an "ersatz king". >Ersatz world/Lewis.

LewisCl IClarence Irving LewisMind and the World Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge (Dover Books on Western Philosophy) 1991

Stalnaker IR. StalnakerWays a World may be Oxford New York 2003

Actualism

Wittgenstein Vs Actualism

Wittgenstein I 306
Possibility/Wittgenstein/Hintikka:Comparisons"logically possible" with "chemically possible". Not any possible connection must exist VsActualism. (Act: "Only the real is possible").
E.g. also a compound HO2 in reality cannot less correspond to something, as no connection.

W IIL. WittgensteinWittgenstein’s Lectures 1930-32, from the notes of John King and Desmond Lee, Oxford 1980German Edition:Vorlesungen 1930-35 Frankfurt 1989

I 162
Determinism/actualism/Dennett:someauthors: if determinism is true, also the actualism must be true. Or vice versa. If actualism is false, indeterminism must be true. >Actualism.
DennettVs: this is wrong! E.g. This oxygen atom can combine with two hydrogen atoms. So something is possible, which is not real now, so determinism is false.
DennettVsActualism: is wrong, regardless of the truth or falsity of determinism.